[QUOTE=The Video Game Critic]I find it hilarious how nobody can figure out what the animal on the first screen is. For the longest time I thought it was a monkey. Then I read that is was a cat. And now I see somebody thought it was a dog.

I was really torn between giving Pitfall 2 an A or A-. I think what pushed me to an A- was the fact that even if you flew under the condor at his highest point, his wing move down and hit you in the head. It was almost a random thing.[/QUOTE]

It's a cat,?! ohh.. get this Dave, I thought it was a Rat or Kangaroo! That's what I wrote on my tip sheet. Had no idea what the heck it was, LOL!

I was really torn between giving Pitfall 2 an A or A-. I think what pushed me to an A- was the fact that even if you flew under the condor at his highest point, his wing move down and hit you in the head. It was almost a random thing.

What do you think? Should I give Pitfall 2 an A?

[/QUOTE]

I do not believe it's a random thing - it's a rhythm thing. This untimed game gives you the opportunity to get your timing down pat on each level with those condors. You can run towards it and retreat when you figure out it's flight pattern and where the "sweet spot" occurs to run under.

Not counting homebrews, there are only a handful of VCS games that made it appear to be a sophisticated gaming machine. Pitfall II knocked it out of the park in 1984 and remains an elite example of how the 2600 kicked ass. I think it is an A+.....will settle for an A......and am mildly upset at the recent downgrade to an A-.

I was really torn between giving Pitfall 2 an A or A-. I think what pushed me to an A- was the fact that even if you flew under the condor at his highest point, his wing move down and hit you in the head. It was almost a random thing.

What do you think? Should I give Pitfall 2 an A?

[/QUOTE]

Not counting homebrews, there are only a handful of VCS games that made it appear to be a sophisticated gaming machine. Pitfall II knocked it out of the park in 1984 and remains an elite example of how the 2600 kicked ass. I think it is an A+.....will settle for an A......and am mildly upset at the recent downgrade to an A-.

It's your world, Boss.......[/QUOTE]

Considering the year 1984, it's not too shocking that Pitfall II is so well done... HERO is also made really well, and many games for 2600 pushed the limits as years pass, like Midnight Magic, Pac-Man Jr, or Solaris. Amazing graphics, sound and controls.

Also since Pitfall was awesome for 1982, then the sequal 2 years later also made by Crane... should be right up there in terms of ass kickin' quality.

I thought the reason Pitfall II was going to be an A- minus, was the overall fun factor of the game, that the Critic questioned, with so many birds to nearly get hit by, too often.

I don't see the appeal of part II being considered better then I "in terms of fun", because there's no vines or pitfalls to jump over or any risk of losing in the game,... mostly part II is timing, running, waiting and once you figure the map, the timing in moving under or over birds/bats/frogs becomes easier... the replay value goes down.

Pitfall II is one of the rare games that almost everyone loves, but I sold mine and don't care if I ever play it again.

First of all, The Mad Blogger thinks that the Video Game Critic's reviews make a lot of sense. If a see a review for a game on the Wii, I'll definitely consider renting it. I may not agree with every review, but I can see where he is coming from. Great job on the reviews.

I think people who do not feel Pitfall is a great game should realize that this game pioneered the side scrolling effort. Before Pitfall, this simply was not possible in video games. I think both Pitfall and Pitfall II deserve As, with perhaps a higher score going to Pitfall II because it took adventuring to a whole different level on the Atari 2600 (no pun intended).

I respectfully disagree with the review for River Raid II. I think the game is atrocious and practically unplayable. River Raid was so much better.